RE: Encrypted Media proposal (was RE: ISSUE-179: av_param - Chairs Solicit Alternate Proposals or Counter-Proposals)

Charles Pritchard wrote:

A greatly good amount of logic and good sense. The issue of Content
Protection is indeed shrouded with a whole layer of philosophical posturing
that needs to be stripped away - we need a technical solution to a real
requirement, and philosophy should not get in the way of that. 

If *you* don't want to use Content Protection, then don't use it in *your*
creative process. If *you* are opposed to Content Protection, do not consume
content that uses Content Protection - vote with your wallet and your feet.
But to throw one's hands up in the air and repeat the "DRM is evil" refrain
ignores real world realities, whether you like them or not, whether you
agree with them or not. As the writers of technical standards, we should not
be making these kinds of value judgments, we should simply be making
technical decisions based on technical knowledge.

> I'm a big fan of lawyers. I know where they are coming
> from, but law is part of the liberal arts, and engineers
> lose sight of that.

Probably the most insightful comment from this entire thread. Amen!

> And CEOs, COOs and CTOs have to weigh the risks.

Yep, the dirty secret that drives the web - to paraphrase a former US
Presidential campaign from 20 years ago - "It's about the commerce, stupid"



Received on Friday, 24 February 2012 08:57:20 UTC